Thank you for contacting me to express your support for extending the assault weapons ban. I appreciate your taking the time to do so. I share your support for extending the ban, and, during consideration of the Gun Liability bill (S. 1805), I voted for an amendment that would have altered the ban's sunset date from September 13, 2004 to September 13, 2014. Because the Senate rejected the underlying bill, however, these amendments did not become law. It is unclear whether the Senate will consider extending the assault weapons ban again during the 108th Congress. Again, thank you for contacting me. I appreciate having the benefit of your views. Sincerely. Susan M. Collins
United States Senator As the saying goes, "You could have knocked me over with a feather".
Now I know this forum is monitored by many politicians from local to national, so I'm going to address Senator Collins publicly, with witnesses, so that there's no question regarding my views on the politically expedient [b]cosmetic features ban[/b], which no person with the intelligence to understand the issue [b]and[/b] only average integrity could possibly support.
Senator,
I called your local office and spoke to your staffer at great length. [I called Senator Snowe's local office and did the same.] I explained that I was raised a Democrat, that in my family you registered when you were old enough, and you registered Democrat. I explained that it was the Second Amendment issue which got me questioning the rhetoric of the Democrat party initially; then of course, I started examining the other platforms of the party.
I explained that this issue was, and I quote, a "deal breaker" for me, that I would not support any politician who supported ineffective, feel-good legislation, and [b]especially[/b] ineffective, feel-good legislation which is anti Second Amendment.
The Assault Weapon ban, which does not ban assault weapons, but rather standard semi-automatic rifles which have cosmetic features to make them [b]look like[/b] [but not perform like] military weapons was an exercise in Congressional power for the sake of [b]appearing[/b] to be doing something to reduce deaths. In this respect, the ban imitates the bill itself in concerning itself with "appearances" only.
I have to assume you have access to the same statistics I have. If you do, you have to know that you could save the lives of more children by banning 5 gallon buckets, than by banning so called "assault weapons".
I told your staffer that my interest was more historical and political than anything else, that I shoot only rarely, don't load my own ammunition, never owned an "assault weapon" and never intend to. At that point I got a comment of "Good. I feel better." I'm not 100% certain what was meant by that comment, but I chose not to be offended at the time.
In conclusion, let me reiterate that I [b]do not[/b] support the extension of the ban. It's possible, I suppose, that your staff members have their own agendas, and are feeding you disinformation. Regardless, if you choose to contact me again, I would appreciate you providing me with the research you've based your vote on. I can only conclude that it's horribly flawed.Sincerely,
Mike Travers

Didn't hear from Senator Snowe.
I'm still steamed. I posted right after I read that letter, and I'm still shaking my head in disbelief. I just got back from shopping for a frame for that letter. It really pays to contact your legislators and let them know what you think. :D

It is also important that at the begining or the end of such a conversation or testemony you mae your postition clear that you either favor or not a policy you are testfiying on.When speaking to the city council or planning board, etc. I always try to start off with my for or against position.Here staffer did not hear that statement.Steven ScharfSCSMedia@aol.com

Is she representing her constituents with her vote on this? Has there been a poll done in her district to see whether the majority supported this or was against it and did her vote represent the people of the district?

quote:Originally posted by Steven Scharf:
[b]It is also important that at the begining or the end of such a conversation or testemony you mae your postition clear that you either favor or not a policy you are testfiying on.When speaking to the city council or planning board, etc. I always try to start off with my for or against position.Here staffer did not hear that statement.Steven ScharfSCSMedia@aol.com[/b]

There was absolutely no way her staffer could have misunderstood me. I stated my position, explained why I was opposed, explained that that was the initial reason I left the Democrat party, that I was not just a Republican, but an [b]active[/b] Republican and that this was a "deal breaker". If the staffer misunderstood me, then the staffer shouldn't be allowed the use of sharp utensils.

quote:Originally posted by Keenan:
[b]Is she representing her constituents with her vote on this? Has there been a poll done in her district to see whether the majority supported this or was against it and did her vote represent the people of the district?[/b]

Her vote, as is too often the case, represented the position of the Maine media. :eek: